WWF Footprint Calculator
The "challenge" is to come up with a score that doesn't make you look like some sort of environmental lout, with no need at all to sign up to "free" service.

Just blow away the cookie file for that site if you want to play again.
The lowest I've managed is 1.36

If a score <1 is in fact impossible on that site, then it's a scam.

06-18-2010

Fossaw

2.55 putting in real values.

06-18-2010

Fossaw

2.55 putting in real values where possible and best estimates otherwise. Example, our house has gas central heating which does base load, but we also have a wood burning stove to top up when it is cold - the quiz lets you pick one or the other.

[edit]Hmph, so I try to edit and end up duplicating.[/edit]

06-18-2010

whiteflags

You should be ashamed. 2.31 being as much of a dick as possible and lying.

I realize now that this wasn't the challenge; my mistake :o

06-18-2010

MK27

I got 2.0 being honest.

Trying to get as low as possible, I get 1.23, which implies that it is impossible to live in Northern Europe* without using a disproportionate amount of resources.

I imagine that's true, but I still think the survey is a little silly. For example, if it were applicable to a wider range of circumstances you could check and see what your footprint would be if you decided to go live in a shack in Venezuela. Certainly, it would be much more informative if the whole formula were explained. Rather dumb otherwise.

* the questionnaire could not apply to many places, because there was no "no heat" option, and bonus points for better insulation in the tropics is absurd -- also no questions about air conditioning, which is horrific in scale here in NYC

06-18-2010

Mario F.

My footprint is 3.34. The shoe size of the abominable snowman.
Some of the questions clearly indicate this is aimed at industrialized countries with a high lifestyle. Fail! And probably why you don't get <= 1 in any possible way.

06-18-2010

MK27

I think there is a for real bug/screw-up in the interface. If you look at the end, your "extra planet" is a total of all your points from each category, and you can obviously not get a negative score anywhere, you just get a lower positive one. My total was 100%, not 200%. Why the extra planet? It's a mistake.

If you subtract one from the result, the lowest possible score is actually 0.23, not 1.23.

06-18-2010

SlyMaelstrom

All I got out of this test was a sudden urge to kill a hippie.

06-18-2010

Cheeze-It

These things are nonsense. They neglect far too many
variables and assume far too much to provide an accurate
assessment of one's impact on the planet.

You're a liar! You cannot get less than 1.00. I've already tried all the combinations. It's a mistake in the interface.

06-18-2010

VirtualAce

2.39. What a load of bull. I could live on this planet for four lifetimes and still not consume 2.39 planets worth of resources. Based on the panda bear logo this survey was done by the same idiots who say the panda bears are endangered when populations are higher now than at any point in history since we've been tracking numbers.

Clearly aimed at morons who believe their garbage. Some of the questions did not apply to the USA very well.

06-18-2010

Cheeze-It

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bubba

2.39. What a load of bull. I could live on this planet for four lifetimes and still not consume 2.39 planets worth of resources.

It's saying that if everybody lived the lifestyle you live,
it would take 2.39 planets worth of resources to support
them.

Quote:

You're a liar! You cannot get less than 1.00. I've already tried all the combinations. It's a mistake in the interface.

This particular test seems kinda flakey, but if it's anything
like Ecological Footprint Quiz by Center for Sustainable Economy,
it takes countryof residence into consideration. If someone
who lives in the United States and someone who lives in
Angola enter the same choices, the United States footprint
will still be almost 3x as high.

I tried to pick the most environmentally detrimental answers
for the myfootprint.org quiz for both Angola as my country
and the US as my country.

Quote:

If everyone on the planet lived my lifestyle, we would need

Angola: 5.06 Earths
U.S.: 13.39 Earths

06-18-2010

Cheeze-It

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bubba

Based on the panda bear logo this survey was done by the same idiots who say the panda bears are endangered when populations are higher now than at any point in history since we've been tracking numbers.

They are absolutely endangered due to habitat loss and
fragmentation. One of the reasons the populations are "higher"
now than at any other time in history is because past
populations were underestimated. Newer studies have
relied on better methods of measure. It's more a reflection
of better monitoring practices than actual organisms.